How do you see on natural science within preschool? Does education and interest play a role for how the educationalist works with natural science? And is the children’s interest for natural science affected by the educationalist, what does the educationalist think himself? These questions have I under my teachers training and under deputyship in preschool asked myself and these questions lies to behalf for my investigation. I interviewed five educationalists on different preschools for my investigation. My investigation resulted in that I have been able to see a certain conjunction between how you work with natural science in preschool and the educationalist education or interest. What also plays a role is that you often associate natural science with knowledge of nature. The educationalist seems overall positive to natural science, but depending of a lack of knowledge it feels strange and difficult. What I also received is that the educationalist thinks that their sight on natural science is infectious. / Hur ser man inom förskolan på naturvetenskap? Spelar pedagogens utbildning och intresse en roll för hur man arbetar med naturvetenskap? Och påverkar pedagogen barns intresse för naturvetenskap, vad tror pedagogen själv? Dessa frågor har jag ställt mig under min lärarutbildning och under vikariat i förskoleverksamhet och de ligger till grund för min undersökning. Jag har i undersökningen intervjuat fem pedagoger på olika förskolor. Resultatet i min undersökning blev att jag kunnat se ett visst samband mellan hur man inom förskolan arbetar med naturvetenskap och den utbildning eller intresse som pedagogen har. Att man ofta förknippar naturvetenskap med naturkunskap spelar också roll. Överlag tycks pedagoger vara positiv till naturvetenskap, den känns främmande och svår beroende på avsaknad av kunskaper. Vad jag också fått fram är att pedagoger tror att deras syn på naturvetenskap smittar av sig.

Science and technologhy for All (abbreviated as NTA) is a processed material that can be used by teachers as a support to engage students in science and technology. The purpose of this survey is to find out how preschool teachers are thinking aboat working with the NTA and which learning the children can achieve from the NTA-box. Implementation of the survey is based on qualitative semi-structured interviews. Semi-structured interviews were chosen in order to avoid the yes and no answers, as well as to be able to put supplementary questions to the respondent. The results show that it makes it easier for teachers to work with processed materials in the subjects of science and technologhy. The teachers felt that it gave them a personal growth in the subject and that it saved time in day-to-day operations. According to the teachers the children have been positive of the NTA-box and contributed to greater language development, conceptual understanding, and motor skills. The teachers could not see much difference between boys`and girls`interest in science and technology.

This work addresses the education of 7–8 years old children in the way of learning science, especially the moment called ”Årstidsväxlingar i naturen” (Seasonal changes in nature) in the curriculum Lgr11 from the ”Core content” and how this subject is taught in a Swedish first grade in primary school. The investigation was aimed to try to find out which methods the teachers are using and what kind of material and technical devises they use, what kind of teaching/learning styles they advocate and how much time they spend for the different moments of teaching in the classroom as well as outdoors. This has been investigated by observation of a first grade class in a Stockholm suburb. The time spent for every moment has been measured and analyzed after notes and sound recordings have been taken. These results are presented in fig. 1–3 where every moment of the classes also is shown. Additional interviews have been conducted with three different teachers, teaching this subject to first graders. The results of these interviews are presented in tab. 1 and appear to be very different from each other. The reasons of these differences are discussed and several hypotheses are proposed.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.